PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM OF

LANKA EVANGELICAL ALLIANCES DEVELOPMENT SERVICE (LEADS)

A Project Report

Prepared By

Judith Radhka Shanuki Pasangna

CCHRM/14/SA/08/01

Course: Certificate Course in Human Resources Management

August, 2014

1
 INSTITUE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT SRI LANKA (INC)

Contents

List of Illustrations Pg 23-25

List of Tables Pg 26-37

Acknowledgement Pg 03

Executive Summary Pg 04

1.11 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the organization

1.2 Objectives of the organization
1.3 Services
1.4 Organization Structure

2. OBEJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

3. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
4. ANALYSIS

4.1 Methodology
4.2 Analysis
5. FINDINGS (KEY ISSUES)

Appendix I Company Data Profiles

Appendix II Survey Questionnaire

Appendix III Additional Data

List of References

2
 Acknowledgement

On the very outset of this project, I would like to extend my sincere & heartfelt obligation
towards all the persons who have helped me in this endeavor. Without their active
guidance, help, cooperation & encouragement, I would not have made headway in the
project. I am grateful to Mr.LEO, LEADS HR Manager for conscientious guidance and
encouragement to accomplish this assignment.

I extend my gratitude to IPM for giving me this opportunity. I also acknowledge with a
deep sense of reverence, my gratitude towards my parents, who have always supported
me morally.

Last but not least, my sincere gratitude to all of my friends who directly or indirectly
helped me to complete this project report.

3
 Executive Summery

The main purpose of this study was to “assess the role of work motivation on
employee performance”. This study in an assessment of this purpose used deductive
approach in which a quantitative survey was carried out among the employees of the
Organization. The survey was intended to get their responses on what they feel about the
existing performance review of the organization, their motivation to work and their job
satisfaction. The analysis from the empirical finding show that many motivating factors
in the performance appraisal system are not included in the existing process.

Since this is a study to help improve the existing system, suitable recommendations are
given according to the survey data.

4
 Chapter: 1

INTRODUCTION

The main objective of this project will be to accomplish a study on the existing
performance evaluation system and to recommend needed changes to the
organization. Employee appraisal is a method by which the job performance of
an employee is documented and evaluated.

Definition

A performance evaluation is also a vital part of performance management. It is

sometimes assumed that performance appraisal is the same thing as performance
management. But there are significant differences. Performance appraisal can be defined
as the formal and periodical assessment and rating or ranking of individuals by their
managers or immediate supervisors, usually at an annual review meeting. Whereas
performance management is a continuous, broader, more comprehensive and natural
process of management that clarifies mutual expectations, emphasizes the support role of
managers who are expected to act as coaches rather than judges with focus on the future.

A performance appraisal is a systematic and periodic process that assesses an individual

employee’s job performance and productivity in relation to certain pre-established criteria
and organizational objectives. Other aspects of individual employees are also considered,
such as organizational citizenship behavior, accomplishments, potential for future
improvement, strengths and weaknesses, etc. At the request of the selected organization
the researcher selected to study the existing performance evaluation system of the
organization and to give recommendations in order to improve the performance
evaluation system of the organization.

5
Performance appraisal could be defined as a structured formal interaction between a
subordinate and supervisor, that usually takes the form of a periodic interview (annual or
semi-annual), in which the work performance of the subordinate is examined and
discussed, with a view to identifying weaknesses and strengths as well as opportunities
for improvement and skills development. Performance appraisal, also known as employee
appraisal, is a method by which the job performance of an employee is evaluated
(generally in terms of quality, quantity, cost and time). Performance appraisal is a part of
career development.

Every organization has been established to achieve certain objectives. These objectives
can be achieved by utilizing the resources like men, machines, materials and money. All
these resources are important but of these, manpower is the most important. It plays an
important role in performing tasks for accomplishing the goals.

Performance is often defined simply in output term that is needed for achievement of
predefined goals. Performance concerns what job is done, how it is done and what has
been achieved. The Oxford English Dictionary confirms this by including the phrase
“carrying out” in its definition of performance: ‘The accomplishment, execution, carrying
out, working out of anything ordered or undertaken.’ High performance is the outcome
for positive behaviors, proper use of knowledge, skills, ability, capability and
competencies.

Performance evaluation reflects an employee’s actual job performance levels, in order to

get the picture, the rating must be accurate. Accuracy is the primary goal of any appraisal
system. Employment decisions that are based on inaccurate ratings are not valid and
would be difficult to justify the legally challenged. Moreover, employees tend to lose
trust in the system when the ratings do not accurately reflect their performance levels.
This causes morale and turnover problems, and hinders in their opportunity advancement.

6
Purpose

Performance appraisal is mainly used for three purposes.

(i) As a basis of reward allocation such as salary increments, promotion and other
rewards.
(ii) Performance appraisal will point out the weaknesses of employees and will
spot the areas where development efforts are needed. Performance appraisal is
a tool for identification of deficiencies.
(iii) It can be used for the selection and development programme. It will
differentiate satisfactory performers from unsatisfactory ones. The
performance appraisal will help the management to perform functions relating
to selection, development, salary, promotion, penalties, lay-off and
retrenchment.
Criticism
Performance appraisal has been criticized by employees because the approach is
bureaucratic and top- down under the control of Human Resource Managers. It was often
backward looking, concentrating on what had gone wrong, rather than looking forward to
future development needs. Performance appraisal schemes existed in isolation.
There was little or no link between them and the needs of the organization. Line
managers have frequently rejected performance appraisal schemes as being time
consuming and irrelevant. Employees have resented the superficial nature with which
appraisals have been conducted by managers who lack the skills required, tend to be
biased and are simply going through the motions

Selected Organization HR background

LEADS HR department has been introduced only recently, consequent to a sudden
expansion of the organization over the past year. Though there was an HR person for the
past 32 years, there is no accurate information regarding the performance evaluation
done in the past. Research reveals there has been only one performance evaluation in the
past decade. Hence no accurate records are kept or any evidence on prevalent Human
Resource Information System. The information on the existing Performance evaluation
system was limited only to the recently developed performance appraisal questionnaire.

7
LEADS is a community development organization passionate and purposeful about
reaching the most vulnerable and poor in Sri Lanka. LEADS is a group of people who
work nationwide to empower the poor and their families in transforming their
communities, to advocate and inform on behalf of the voiceless and to provide care for
people and communities experiencing emergency physical harm and long term neglect.

LEADS has been responding to the needs of Sri Lankan communities for over 25 years
from the disaster caused by the cyclone on the east coast in 1978, to tsunami relief work
in 2005, to prevention of child sexual abuse to drug rehabilitation and many other
programs. LEADS received two awards of appreciation in 2004-2005 from former
President Chandrika Kumaranatunge for tsunami relief and shelter work and for
noteworthy work in development and relief from then Minister of Agriculture
Development & Chairman Hambantota District Coordination Committee, Chamal
Rajapakshe.

Although initially birthed as the Relief and Development arm of the Evangelical Alliance
of Ceylon (EAC, presently known as the National Christian Evangelical Alliance, Sri
Lanka - NCEASL)., with its own Board of Directors, LEADS now functions as an
autonomous organization. In 1984, the agency was registered as a Social Service
Organization (Registered Social service Organization No: 11/41/407/84). Subsequently
LEADS received charity status by an act of Parliament (Approved Charity Gazette No:
370 of 04.10.85) and is now a fully registered NGO with the government (Reg. No. L
11401/2000), with an annual audited statement of accounts.

1.1 Background Of The Organization

LEADS boast of a rich and vibrant history, spanning almost 35years. When the 1978
cyclone battered the shores of the Eastern Province of Sri Lanka, leaving a trail of
death and destruction in its wake, a few members of the Evangelical Fellowship of
Ceylon (now National Christian Evangelical Alliance of Sri Lanka- NCEASL) was

8
 triggered to action. With the limited resources at their disposal and with the assistance
of few volunteers, they provided shelter and medical care to those that were affected.
With renewed conviction in the social responsibility of the church towards the
country during this national calamity, these individuals were motivated to establish a
relief and development arm of the NCEASL. This was the birth of Lanka Evangelical
Alliance Development Service (LEADS) in March 1983. The organization was
registered as a social service organization in 1984, after which it was granted with
Charity Status by an Act of Parliament in 1985.The organization is now registered as
an NGO.

The mainly relief- oriented work of LEADS started picking up momentum and
visibility and numerous informal collaborations were formed with other like-minded
organizations and churches. The escalation of communal tension culminated in the
1983 July riots that lead to the civil war which saw LEADS entering the foray of
reconstruction, resettlement and livelihood development. By 1990, LEADS created an
identity for itself as a cost-effective shelter provider and an organization adept at
responding swiftly to national disasters. Its reputation and credentials prompted even
the Government to partner with LEADS on various projects\

1.2 Objectives of the organization

Mission:
“The mission of LEADS is to be a compassionate, educative and active Christian
resource agency, working with the neglected, vulnerable and disadvantaged in
community transformation, reconciliation and restoration in a journey towards the
achievement of fullness of life.”

Vision
“For Sri Lankan communities in need to experience the love of God demonstrated
through our compassionate and active service.”

9
 Statement of Values

1. LEADS is committed to upholding and promoting human wholeness, in inherent

dignity and equality of every man, woman and child irrespectively of caste, race
or creed.
2. LEADS is committed to defending the rights of the most vulnerable and
disadvantaged men, women and children in the Srilankan society, especially their
rights to life, freedom from exploitation and discrimination and access to
affordable healthcare, food,education,livelihood,protection and shelter.
3. LEADS is committed to supporting efforts to maintain and uphold justice,
promote peace, social harmony and equity.
4. LEADS is committed to working with the poor and not only for the poor, thus
encouraging the poor to become the agents of their own transformation.
5. LEADS is committed to working with those marginalized substance abusers and
children sexually exploited.
6. LEADS is committed to protecting the regenerating capacities of natural
environment in all the projects that it undertakes and encouraging all its stake
holders to do the same.
7. LEADS is committed to partnership with other like-minded agencies in building
wholesome communities at both village and wider levels of the society.
8. LEADS is committed to the responsible stewardship of all its financial, physical
and human resources, practicing financial transparency and accountability in all
activities.
9. LEADS is committed to promoting integrity of character, professional
competence and a spirit of teamwork among its field and administrative staff

10
Process of the organization

DONOR
(funds)

PARTNER LiAISON PROGRAMS & ESCAPE

(Reporting,Programs Monitoring (Field Program
&Evaluation,Publications,Donor
coordination and information) design,Implementation,m
HR,Logistics onitoring,evaluation)
,IT

FINANCE DEPARTMENT
(Finance managementt and
Financial reporting)

11
12
1.3 Service Profile

The work which originally began in the North/East spread to areas such as Avissawella,
Kurunegala and Kandy with time. It was during this period that LEADS helped to set-up
several Community Based Organizations (CBOs) in Jaffna for the easy implementation
of projects. This distinct footprint later became one of the key strategies of the
organization.

The booming tourism of 90’s brought with it a fresh threat to Sri Lanka’s shores: child
prostitution. LEADS responded to the increase of child abuse cases by establishing
ESCAPE (Eradicating Sexual Child Abuse Prostitution and Exploitation) in 1995, which
was instrumental in setting up of the NCPA (National Child Protection Authority). The
Executive Director of LEADS at the time had the distinct honour of serving on the
original board of the NCPA. LEADS was able to reach out and create a positive social
reformation through their programmes which were set into motion during the decade that
followed the turn of the century. The ceasefire agreement between the Government and
the LTTE presented LEADS with the opportunity to engage in the area of reconciliation.
LEADS’ representation in the Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process (SCOPP)
was a significant achievement for the organization in its field presence.

The advent of the new Government in 2005 also saw the rapid escalation of the war
culminating with the decimation of the LTTE in May 2009. Subsequently advanced
security measures were imposed by the Government with NGOs being closely scrutinized;
this resulted in restricting the freedom of NGOs to operate in the country. This rapidly
changing post war scenario posed a fresh set of challenges to LEADS to strengthen its
presence in the country. Presently LEADS’ work covers 13 districts in Sri Lanka namely:
Jaffna, Mannar, Colombo, Matara, Hambantota, Ampara, Trincomalee, Killinochchi,
Mullaithivu, Kandy, Kurunegala, Ratnapura and Badulla. With a staff of over 80
dedicated individuals, LEADS’ work includes, inter alia community development,
livelihood development, relief and reconstruction, prevention of child abuse and
rehabilitation and disaster response and mitigation. All of these activities are undertaken
with a focus on eradicating poverty and human suffering and improving the quality of life

13
of disadvantaged groups of society.

In order to the above the services offered by LEADS are,

Community Development

"To be a catalyst in the process of empowering communities to transform out of their

deprivation, vulnerability, disadvantage and entrapment of circumstances to reach
towards self determined ends and self reliance" is what LEADS aims to do through this
intervention. "By the communities for the communities", the philosophy that LEADS
follows, which guides communities towards discovering their own potential in seeking
their own solutions through participatory development in achieving self-sufficiency. The
organization targets & seeks groups that would fall into the category of "the poorest of
the poor". This means seeking out people that are neglected or forgotten in the tide of
other development activities. Usually families for these projects are selected in
consultation with the local government authority. LEADS seek through this to bring
about social transformation that changes their values and seeks to improve their quality of
life. A "cluster" of programmes is carried out in each village. These range from
Leadership & Empowerment, Shelter, Literacy, Health & Sanitation, Vocational
Training, Income Generation, Micro Enterprise Development & loan schemes. The range
of programmes are dependent on the findings of a PRA ( Participatory Rural Appraisal)
which is conducted prior to programme implementation. Prioritized needs in their
respective communities are identified by the community themselves. The catalysts for
these programmes are the Project Officers of LEADS who are resident in the areas itself.
The programme reaches more than 8500 families every year in the districts of
Kurunegala, Kandy, Ratnapura, Colombo, Matara and Hambantota.Another aspect of
community development is the child centred community development which LEADS has
stepped into. In these projects, a rights based approach is followed concerning the rights
of children."

Rehabilitative Community

14
 In this, LEADS minister to individuals who are marginalized as a
result of disabilities, substance abuse, Sexual Child Abuse, & Prisons &
caste/social structures. Presently, the greatest amount of work in this area is done
through the ministry of ESCAPE (Eradication of Sexual Child Abuse, Prostitution
& Exploitation).

Relief and Rehabilitation

“Providing an integrated response to disasters by meeting appropriate basic
immediate needs, facilitating normalcy, minimize risk and negative impact in
conforming to accepted standards through coordinated efforts that protect human
dignity towards their rehabilitation,” is what LEADS aims to do through this
intervention. When you needed a neighbor LEADS was there…” Relief &
Rehabilitation Ministries are carried out on two levels. There is the basic form of
relief given towards natural or man-made disasters. In this area LEADS has a
policy that relief will be provided within 24 - 48 hrs (of event or request) if it is
within the regions covered by its Project Officers. In areas outside of their
purview, relief has to get to the point of need within 72 - 96 hrs of request.
Dry Rations being weighed. The second form of relief is to the many thousands of
Internally Displaced Persons (Refugees). In this case, the programme is ongoing.
In the present context of dawning peace, LEADS undertakes several resettlement
programmes that integrate shelter and community development to these desperate
people. In addition, we seek to rehabilitate victims of disaster through the
provision of income generation & livelihood schemes. Disaster Mitigation is
another aspect that is encompassed within this area dealing in community based
disaster preparedness and contingency planning. Most recently drought mitigation
is a key area that is being concentrated on – attempting to provide a total relief
rather than a handout. Currently LEADS works in the areas of Trincomalee,
Jaffna, Amparai, Mannar and Vavuniya to provide relief and longer term
rehabilitation for over 55,000 families.

15
Advocacy and Social Harmony

“Creating a harmonious community active and aware on issues of justice and

peace by value sharing and training among all conflicting communities” is what
LEADS aims to do through this intervention.

It was Niemoller who said when I looked for someone “..to speak for me, there
was none” . LEADS believes that the voice of the voiceless is the responsibility of
those with a voice. Rather than cursing the darkness LEADS seeks to light a
candle of hope. We understand that poverty alleviation does not simply stop at
provision of services but also has to address the root causes of poverty that often
lie with inadequate policy or rights denied. In the midst of many issues and rights
denied to vulnerable communities LEADS picks issues of advocacy with care.
Issues related to basic rights and cross cutting issues (ex HIV/Aids) are key areas
we seek involvement. Given the results of 30 year long ethnic conflict that has
further contributed to poverty and come as an obstacle to development, LEADS
also engages in grass root level peace building initiatives and mid-level
interventions to facilitate this process.

16
1.4 Organization Structure

17
 Chapter :2

Objectives of The Study

1. To accomplish a study on the existing performance evaluation system. The main

purposes developed for this thesis is to assess the factors that motivate employees

to perform best at work.

2. Carrying out a survey

3. To analyze collected data and find facts in the prevailing system.

4. To recommend needed changes to the organization.

18
 Chapter: 3

Review Of Literature

Performance evaluation and purpose

Performance appraisals are considered to be as important human resource management

tools (Milliman,Kim & Von Glinow, 1993; Gomez-Mejia, Balkin, & Cardy, 1995), and
serve a number of purposes in organizations (Cleveland et. al, 1989). According to
Cumming & Schwab (1973), the objectives of performance appraisals can be categorized
as either evaluative or developmental, however, these purposes are compatible. Cleveland
et.al, (1989) found in their study that both administrative (i.e., evaluative) and
developmental purposes underlie performance appraisal even though the majority of
respondents indicated that the primary purpose of the appraisal system was
administrative.
Brumback, (1988), stated that performance appraisals have been used primarily for two
purposes - to help make administrative decisions (i.e. evaluative) and to meet
developmental objectives. The evaluative purposes are primarily concerned with looking
back at how employees have performed over a given time period, against a required
standard of performance. The developmental functions is concerned with improving the
performance of employees by identifying areas of improvement, setting performance
targets for the future, and agree on plans for follow-up actions.
Information collected from performance appraisal is used for making decisions about
employees such as promotion, transfers, discharge, layoff, compensation, training need
analysis and programs, and providing feedback for employee development (Landy and
Farr, 1983; Ostroff, 1993). Appraisal information has also been widely used for
performance improvement, feedback, development and documentation, as well as for
research and evaluation such as test validation (Ferris, Barnum, Rosen, Holleran, and
Dulebohn, 1995), and to evaluate human resource policies and programs (Fisher,
Schoenfeldt, & Shaw, 1996).

19
Various other studies have reported their findings about the purposes of performance
appraisal in organizations. Levin (1986), found the most common uses of performance
appraisal to be one of determining employee training needs, merit review and salary
administration. Thomas and Bretz (1994) reported from their study that performance
appraisal information is most likely to be used for employee development or to
administer merit pay. Thomas and Bretz (1994) identified the main developmental uses
as improving work performance, communicating expectations, determining employee
potential and aiding employee counseling. Apart from administering merit pay, other
administrative uses are promotions, layoffs, transfers, termination, and validation of
hiring decisions.

The role of Performance Evaluation

People are the company's most valuable asset. While most assets
depreciate over time, people, viewed as assets, may actually appreciate. One of the
manager's major responsibilities is to improve and update the knowledge and skills of
employees -- appreciation of assets. Performance appraisal plays a significant role as a
tool and technique of organizational development and growth. In essence, effective
appraisal systems provide both evaluation and feedback. The main aim of the evaluation
is to identify performance gaps. When performance does not meet the organizational
standards, feedback is necessary to inform employee about those performance gaps.

From the employee's perspective, performance appraisal informs them about what is
required of them in order to do their jobs, it tells them how well they have achieved those
objectives and helps them take corrective action to improve their performance, and,
finally, it may reward them for meeting the required standards.

The firm, on the other hand, needs a performance appraisal system in order to establish
principles of managerial accountability. Clearly, where employees are given
responsibilities and duties, they need to be held accountable. One of the functions of

20
performance appraisals is to ensure that people are accountable for their organizational
responsibilities.

Performance evaluation and motivation

Motivational research has recognized the power of recognition as an incentive as

the Maslow and the Expectancy Theory of Motivation. Performance appraisals provide
employees with recognition for their work efforts. The appraisal system provides the
supervisor with an opportunity to indicate to employees that the organization is interested
in their performance and development. This recognition can have a positive motivational
influence. on the individual's sense of worth, commitment and belonging.

21
 Chapter: 4
Analysis
4.1 Methodology

4.1.1 Techniques
A questionnaire is essentially a structured technique for collecting primary data. The
researcher has chosen the Primary data collection method using a questionnaire and
interview techniques. The questionnaire was built on in three main categories, which are,

 Existing Evaluation Process

 Motivation
 Job satisfaction

The researcher believes that the above categories helped the respondents understand
better and the researcher to analyze the topic.

4.12 Participants
The participants were selected from persons falling under the category of “Employees
working with LEADS for one year or more” because 75% of the employees have joined
recently due to the sudden expansion of the organization. The respondents were selected
under purposive sampling. 20 respondents were selected from the whole of 50
employees of the organization under purposive sampling method.

Respondents Number
Line manager 01
Support manager 01
Programs staff 02
ESCAPE staff 12
HR staff 01
Logistics 02
Finance staff 02
Total 20

22
List of Illustrations

Illustration No:1

Motivation factor of the employee

Motivation Factor

20% 15% Money

Recognition
20% Responsibilities
15%
Rewards
Quality Of supervision
30%

The above chart states that the majority of the Respondents (30%) consider
Responsibilities as a major motivating factor.

23
 Illustration No: 2

Grievance satisfaction of the employee

8
7
6
5
4 Selected Employees
3
2
1
0
Good Satisfied Unsatisfied

The above illustration shows that a number of Respondents (13) are satisfied with the
grievance handling of the employer.

Illustration No: 3

Motivation for further Education

20

15

Number of
10 Employees

0
Yes No

The selected number of Respondents (19) shows that the existing appraisal system of
LEADS does not encourage further studies.

24
 Illustration No: 4

Relationship status between Employer and Employee

12

10

6 Number of employees

0
Very Good Satisfied Unsatisfied

A significant number of Respondents (11) stated that they are satisfied with the
relationship with the immediate superior.

Illustration No: 5

Satisfaction of the current appraisal system of LEADS

10%

Yes
No

90%

The above chart shows that, a significant number of Respondents (90%) are not satisfied
with the current system of LEADS.

25
 List Of Tables

Table No: 1

AGREEMENT ON TIME CONSUMPTION OF THE CURRENT APPRAISAL

SYSTEM

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 08
No 10
N/A 02
Total 20

A proportionate number of Respondents (10) don’t agree that the current appraisal system
of LEADS is time consuming

Table No: 2

Difficulty in managers intervention in completing the Form

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 09
No 08
Sometimes 01
N/A 02
Total 20

A fair number of Respondents(09) agree that it is not difficult to get the managers to
complete the appraisal form.

26
 Table No:3

Agreement on getting meetings to discuss each stage of the process is difficult

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 11
No 8
N/A 1
Total 20

A proportionate number of Respondents(11) agree that there is difficulty in getting

meetings to discuss each process.

Table No : 4

The appraisals once completed are put aside

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 14
No 6
Total 20

A proportionate number of respondents (14) agree that the appraisals once completed
are just put aside.

27
 Table: 5

Evidence of Performance is not gathered throughout the year

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 17
No 03
Total 20

A significant number of Respondents (17) says that evidence is not gathered throughout
the year.

Table : 6

Ratings are based on subjective judgment

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 12
No 06
N/A 02
Total 20

A proportionate number of Respondents (12) says that the ratings are seen as based on
subjective judgment.

28
 Table : 7

All responsibilities lie with the Manager

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 9
No 8
N/A 3
Total 20

A fair number of Respondents (09) say that all responsibilities of the appraisal lie with
the manager.

Table : 8

Quality of personal objectives is poor

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 14
No 6
Total 20

A significant number of Respondents (14) say that the quality of personal objective in the
appraisal system is poor.

29
 Table: 9

Team Objectives does not exist

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 14
No 06
Total 20

A significant number of Respondents (14) say that the team objective does not exist in
the performance appraisal system

Table: 10

There is no process exists for cascading Personal Objectives

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 15
No 05
Total 20

A significant number of Respondents (15) say that there is no process exists for cascading
personal objectives.

30
 Table No: 11

There are no reminders for the forth coming quarter completion dates

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 14
No 06
Total 20

A significant proportion of Respondents (14) say that there is no reminder for the forth
coming quarter completion dates.

Table No : 12

The evaluation process does not support our cultural change over time

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 12
No 07
N/A 01
Total 20

A fair number of Respondents (12) say that the current evaluation process does not
support our cultural change over time.

31
 Table No: 13

Evidence in competency development is not included

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 05
No 15
Total 20

A significant number of Respondents (15) say that there is no evidence in competency

development is included in the performance appraisal process.

Table No: 14

Evidence on progress towards qualifications is not included

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 15
No 05
Total 20

A significant number of Respondents (15) state that there is no evidence on progress

towards qualifications is included in the current appraisal process.

32
 Table No: 15

Evidence from project work is not included

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 13
No 05
N/A 02
Total 20

A proportionate number of Respondents (13) state that there is no evidence that project
work is included in the performance appraisal process.

Table No: 16

Feedback on good or poor progress is saved up to the end of the year

Agreement Number of respondents

Yes 07
No 11
N/A 2
Total 20

A proportionate number of respondents (11) say that the feed back on good or poor
progress is not saved up to the end of the year.

33
 Table No: 17

Successes are rarely recorded

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 14
No 06
Total 20

A significant number of respondents (14) say the success of the employee is rarely
recorded in the performance evaluation process.

Table No: 18

Low performance is highlighted, but no development support is defined

Agreement Number of respondents

Yes 05
No 13
N/A 02
Total 20

A proportionate number of respondents (13) say that the low performance is not
highlighted and that development support is also given when needed.

34
 Table No:19

Personal Development Plans does not exist

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 16
No 02
N/A 02
Total 20

A significant number of respondents (16) say that the personal development plans for
the Respondents does not exist.

Table NO : 20

High performing staff are not easily identified

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 11
No 05
N/A 04
Total 20

A proportionate number of respondents (11) say that high performing staff are not easily
identified.

35
 Table No: 21

Participation is not at the required level in the process

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 13
No 07
Total 20

A proportionate number of respondents (13) state that the participation level is not at the
required level.

Table No: 22

No direct link to the relevant HR processes exists

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 13

No 07
Total 20

A proportionate number of respondents (13) say that there is no direct link to the relevant
HR processes.

36
 Table No: 23

LEADS do not have the facility to provide automated performance appraisal system

Agreement Number of Respondents

Yes 15
No 4
N/A 1
Total 20

A significant number of respondents (15) say that LEADS do not have the facility to
provide automated performance appraisal system.

4.2 Analysis

1. Illustration No:1 states that the majority of the Respondents (30%)

consider Responsibilities as a motivating factor.
2. Illustration No:2 shows that a number of Respondents (13) are satisfied
with the grievance handling of the employer.
3. Illustration No:3 shows that a number of Respondents (19) state that the
existing appraisal system of LEADS is not encouraging for further
studies.
4. Illustration No:4 shows that a significant number of Respondents (11) say
that they are satisfied with the relationship with the immediate superior
5. Illustration No:5 shows that a significant number of Respondents (90%)
are not satisfied with the current system of LEADS.
6. Table No: 1 shows that a fair number of Respondents (10) don’t agree
that the current appraisal system of LEADS is time consuming.
7. Table No; 2 shows that a fair number of number of respondents (09)
agree that it is not difficult to get the managers to complete the appraisal
form.

37
8. Table No: 3 shows that a fair number of Respondents(11) agree that
there is a difficulty in getting meetings to discuss each process.
9. Table No: 4 shows that a propionate number of respondents (14) agree
that the files once completed are just kept aside after appraisal.
10. Table No:5 shows that significant number of Respondents (17) say that
evidence is not gathered throughout the year.
11. Table No:6 shows that a fair number of Respondents(12) say that the
ratings are seen as based on subjective judgment.
12. Table No: 7 shows that a fair number of Respondents (09) say that all
responsibilities of the appraisal lie with the manager.
13. Table No: 8 shows that a significant proportion of Respondents (14) say
that the quality of personal objectives in the appraisal system is poor
14. Table No: 9 shows that a proportion of Respondents (14) say that the
team objective does not exist in the performance appraisal system
15. Table No:10 shows that a significant number of Respondents (15) say
that there is no process exists for cascading personal objectives.
16. Table No:11 shows that a significant proportion of Respondents (14) say
that there is no reminder for the forth coming quarter completion dates.
17. Table No:12 shows that a fair number of Respondents (12) say that the
current evaluation process do not support cultural change over time.
18. Table No: 13 shows that a significant number of Respondents (15) say
that there is no evidence in competency development is included in the
performance appraisal process.
19. Table no: 14 shows that significant number of Respondents (15) state that
there is no evidence on progress towards qualifications is included in the
current appraisal process.
20. Table No: 15 shows that a proportionate of Respondents (13) state that
there is no evidence that the project work is included in the performance
appraisal process.

38
21. Table No:16 shows that a proportionate number of respondents(11) say
that the feed back on good or poor progress is not saved up to the end of
the year.
22. Table No: 17 shows that a significant number of respondents (14) say that
the success of the employee is rarely recorded in the performance
evaluation process.
23. Table No: 18 shows that a proportionate number of respondents (13) say
that the low performance is not highlighted but the development support
is also given when needed.
24. Table No:19 shows that a significant number of respondents(16) say that
the personal development plans for the Respondents does not exists.
25. Table No: 20 shows that a proportionate number of respondents (11) say
that high performing staff are not easily identified.
26. Table No:21 shows that a proportionate number of respondents (13) state
that the participation level is not at the required level.
27. Table No: 22 shows that a proportionate number of respondents (13) say
that there is no direct link to the relevant HR processes.
28. Table No: 23 shows that a significant number of respondents (15) say that
LEADS does not have the facility to provide automated performance
appraisal system

39
 CHAPTER : 5

Findings

1. The current appraisal system does not encourage further studies.

2. The staff are not satisfied with the current appraisal system.
3. There is a difficulty in meeting to discuss the entire process.
4. Appraisals once completed are just put aside with no action taken.
5. Evidences are not gathered throughout the year.
6. The ratings seem to be based on subjective judgment.
7. All responsibilities of the appraisal lies with the manager
8. Quality of personal objectives setting is poor in the appraisal.
9. A team objective does not exist.
10. There is no process of cascading personal objectives.
11. No reminder for the forthcoming quarter completion dates.
12. Current evaluation processes does not support the cultural changes which had
happened over time.
13. There is no evidence for competency development.
14. There is no evidence for skill development.
15. There is no evidence of the project work being included in the performance
appraisal system.
16. Success of the employees are rarely recorded.
17. Personal development plans does not exist.
18. High performing staff are not identified.
19. Participation level of the employee in the appraisal system is not up to
expectations.
20. There is no direct link to the relevant HR process.
21. There is no facility to provide automated appraisal system.

40
 CHAPTER : 6
Recommendations

1. Design a proper appraisal form incorporating self-appraisal and allowing

employees to comment on findings mentioned above.
2. Introduce personal development plans in the new template.
3. Attendance and punctuality need to be covered in the new appraisal.
4. The employee must be allowed to agree/disagree with the comments given by the
supervisor before the appraisal form is submitted to the HR Dept.
5. Once a new appraisal system is introduced, train the staff so that maximum info is
received via the appraisal system.
6. If budgets permit, introduce a Human Resources Information System.
7. Introduce a Plan to help employees further their studies and achieve their career
goals.

41
 List OF References

Books

1. Performance Management and Appraisal Systems: HR Tools for Global

Competitiveness- T.V.Rao

2. Levine, H. Z. (1986) Performance Appraisal at work.

3. Bretz, Jr. R. D., Milkovich, G. T., & Read, W. (1992). The current state
of performance appraisal practice: concerns, directions, and implications.
Journal of Management Studies. Cornell Uni.
4. Bernardin, J. H., & Klatt, L. A (1985), Managerial Appraisal Systems:
Has practice caught up to the state of the art? Personnel Administrator,
November, 79-82, 84-86.
5. Cleveland, J. N., Murphy, K. R. & Willams. R. E. (1989). Multiple Uses
of Performance Appraisal:
6. Cummings, L. L., & Schwab, D. (1973). Performance in organizations:
Determinants and Appraisals.
7. Glenview, Illinois: Scott Foresman,Grint, K. (1993) What’s wrong with
performance appraisals? A critique and a suggestion.
8. Human resource Management Journal-Levine, H. Z. (1986) Performance
Appraisal at work. Personnel.
9. Smith, B. N., Hornsby, J. S., & Shirmeyer, R., (1996). Current trends in
performance appraisal: and examination of managerial practice. SAM
Advance Management Journal.

42
Websites

http://www.scribd.com/doc/50116108/Literature-Review-on-Performance-
Appraisal#force_seo

http://topacademicpapers.blogspot.com/2011/02/performance-appraisal-literature-
review.html

http://www.assignmentpoint.com/business/human-resource-management/project-
report-on-performance-appraisal-and-its-process-of-employees-of-social-
investment-bank-ltd.html

http://www.flexstudy.com/catalog/schpdf.cfm?coursenum=94060

https://www.google.lk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&cad=rja&
uact=8&ved=0CF4QFjAJ&url=http%3A%2F%2Forgs.bloomu.edu%2Fgasi%2F20
11%2520pdfs%2FGizaw.pdf&ei=KfqMVLixHpfdav6hgaAM&usg=AFQjCNHhoW
p-Oc4BLOyAzLQvIwMcgc7UtA&sig2=EqZ_NELyp_t4hsV-
FtIa4w&bvm=bv.81828268,d.d2s

https://www.google.lk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&u
act=8&ved=0CEsQFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ftms.edu.my%2Fpdf%2FD
ownload%2FUndergraduateStudent%2FIOP%2520STUDENT%2520ARTICLES
%2Fperformance%2520measurement%2520and%2520management%2520literatu
re%2520review.pdf&ei=KfqMVLixHpfdav6hgaAM&usg=AFQjCNG_fm7sXE1YE
dU9TRq5_vtafKSLlg&sig2=L4t8mc15u21zkX_TStzvkA&bvm=bv.81828268,d.d2s

https://www.google.lk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&u
act=8&ved=0CFEQFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fgm.usj.edu.lb%2Ffiles%2
Fa12008.pdf&ei=KfqMVLixHpfdav6hgaAM&usg=AFQjCNF8qo4RgmVU1GjFhF
DGuCVbjdhaSw&sig2=ss7e7RxW4o02vYDPJOCXLQ&bvm=bv.81828268,d.d2s

43